Talk:The Law of Identity
Omniscience While I don't personally believe in omnipotence without omnisicence, if the rest of the wiki wants to regard it as such I won't oppose. On the other hand listing the law of identity as "Likely Omniscient" is wrong. We know for a fact that there are things she doesn't know. Both because of the " “So what can you do?” “I can do many things. But I may not be able to do anything.” “Which is it?” “Who knows. Not even I know. However, I understand what you want to do, at least to a certain extent.” ''" and because of the " ''“What am I supposed to do? Please tell me.” “No one knows that, but the past can teach us what our mistakes were. That is all there is to it. It is said in the world of man that with great power comes great responsibility, but the truth is that great power allows an individual to grant their desires. However, this always leads to an effect.” “You’re talking about causality. Are you trying to say you alone are god?” “No. I am the beginning of one’s sense of self. I am the starting point. I have existed since the dawn of time, so I have seen many mistakes. But not even I know what is right. What is right is defined by the desires of whoever has power.” " quote. She is Nigh-Omniscient; Nothing more nothing less. DontTalk (talk) 19:40, January 15, 2017 (UTC) Okay. I will adjust the page accordingly. Antvasima (talk) 08:24, January 16, 2017 (UTC) Small reminder Just wanted to point out that it's been a month, since the discussion about whether the, already applied, stat change is legitimate was postponed. I am not one to pressure it if everyone doesn't have time currently (I myself don't have much time currently after all), but if that's the case the under revision template should added to the article or something to make clear that the current stat isn't finalized. DontTalk (talk) 22:59, February 20, 2017 (UTC) I can add it, since the discussion never properly concluded, though A6 seemed firmly against LoI being full on tier 0. Azathoth the Abyssal Idiot (talk) 23:01, February 20, 2017 (UTC) I think that an under revision tag seems inappropriate, as we are unlikely to ever conclude the discussion with a complete agreement from all parties. The general consensus seems to have been to list the entity as tier 0, as it is supposed to be at the absolute top of all fictional hierarchies. Antvasima (talk) 08:34, February 21, 2017 (UTC) Besides, it is simply ridiculous to rank someone who is "Omnipotent" from the perspective of a High 1-A anything less than Tier 0, simply due to a lack of complete Omniscience. This is fiction, and she isn't Omnipotent, just like no character in our wiki. Matthew Schroeder (talk) 13:02, February 21, 2017 (UTC) Tier 0s are rated by their boundless state of being, not their intelligence. It is too controversial, as in seen in the thread, to apply the omnipotence paradox to questionable omnipotence in fiction. No character is omnipotent, there is no proof that any of our omniscient Tier 0s are actually omniscient so it should not be what makes or breaks a Tier 0. Sera Loveheart (talk) 14:28, February 21, 2017 (UTC) The only two High 1-A in the story, besides TLoI, are Sai Akuto for the small timeframe in which he is in the process of being absorbed into TLoI, in which he has that power only because of that very process, and Brave after the current Law of Identity makes him the next Law of Identity. So given that the only 2 High 1-A in the story both barely appear as such and get their power directly from TLoI that is hardly an argument. And wasn't the discussion about points different than just lack of omniscience as well? In my opinion closing the discussion with the reason of postponing it temporarly and then never reopening it is at the very least bad manners, independent of how reasonable you guys find the opposition. If you want to close it due to common agreement of a result, then at least say so right away. Either way if Tier 0 is to stay the reasoning for the AP stat on the profile has to be changed or deleted IMO. I agree with A6colute that the current text on that is the reasoning for a High 1-A, not a Tier 0. DontTalk (talk) 15:11, February 21, 2017 (UTC) Hm...I am not incredibly familiar with the franchise, but DT seems to make some good points, especially since I was not aware the other High 1-A characters were just also parts of TLoI. The reasoning as of now does seem more fit for a High 1-A, if TLoI has indeed expressed some sort of limitation in some manner. Perhaps High 1-A is better? It recall DarkLK mentioning something along the lines of the difference between High 1-A and 0 not always reflecting a difference in power, but a difference in limitation. Azathoth the Abyssal Idiot (talk) 18:16, February 21, 2017 (UTC) So we're arguing about descriptions now? The Divine Presence doesn't have a description at all. Ven explained it to me that the difference between High 1-A and 0 is trivial and almost miniscule. High 1-A only exists to explain the status of beings such as Yog-Sothoth who would be Tier 0 but some minor detail prevented it from qualifying (in its case, being created by Azathoth). The current description is fine because all hierarchies of stories includes several apparent 1-A gods who create stories.Sera Loveheart (talk) 11:50, February 22, 2017 (UTC) I agree with Sera. Antvasima (talk) 11:58, February 22, 2017 (UTC) I guess no one ever made the changes or did the whole splitting it into 2 pages thing. Darkmon cns (talk) 13:05, August 27, 2018 (UTC)